Midway

[Saintsman]

Just seen the film Midway on Sky.

One of the better war films IMO.

War is bad enough on land, never mind at sea. I'm just glad that I never had to experience it. Respect to those that did.

[NutLoose]

Yep, I enjoyed it. I don’t know how accurate it was but it was enjoyable.

[SASless]

I would encourage the reading of "Never Call Me A Hero"....about N. Jack "Dusty" Kleiss, (ISBN 978-0-06-269205-4) which relates his experiences while flying Dive Bombers in the US Navy during the Battle of Midway.

He received the Navy Cross for Heroism and was very much the reluctant Hero....as he as most of his caliber attributed the success of the Battle to the so many others that were lost while participating in one of the greatest and most important sea battles of modern history.

The final pages where he describes the gallantry of others who carried on in their attacks on the Japanese Carriers despite knowing they did not have sufficient fuel to return to their own carrier and the complete loss of Torpedo Squadron 8 less a single Man, Ensign George Gay, as well as the losses by Scouting Squadron 6 proves how much those Men deserved credit for their actions.

Kleiss scored a bomb hit on two Carriers and one Cruiser during the Battle and lived to be 100 years old having retired as a Captain.

The Book is an excellent recounting of what went on during the battle and tells the story in a very personal and moving way.

They have been called "The Greatest Generation" for very good reasons.

[tdracer]

SAS - which version of the movie, the 1976 original, or the 2019 remake? I think they both have pluses and minuses, but the excessive use of CGI in the remake really annoyed me.
I think Dusty Kleiss should have been used for the focal for the remake - he would have been a far better choice.

There was a very good documentary on the Smithsonian Channel a while back - memory says it was called "Battle of Midway - The True Story" (or something close to that) that featured Dusty Kleiss prominently.

Edit to add:
Found it - available to stream from Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Midway-True-Story/dp/B08175Y46L

[ORAC]

Didn’t like it because of the CGI and the way they used to reinforce tropes - the things mocked in “The Last Action Hero”.

Every air battle has the air crammed with aircraft passing inches from each other. Every aircraft hit has to burst into flames and the wing fall off. As for the pop-up with engine iff to land on the deck - I suppose every aviation movie now has to have a Maverick “fly right by” gimmick.

Much preferred customer the original which involved many who had fought in the war and reflected the way people actually behaved at the time.

[NutLoose]

I cannot understand the hatred of CGI, without it you wouldn’t have a film, or you would end up with sh*te like Dunkirk…( the last one) also to be honest good CGI you do not realise you are watching it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL6hp8BKB24

[SASless]

SAS - which version of the movie, the 1976 original, or the 2019 remake? I think they both have pluses and minuses, but the excessive use of CGI in the remake really annoyed me.
I think Dusty Kleiss should have been used for the focal for the remake - he would have been a far better choice.

There was a very good documentary on the Smithsonian Channel a while back - memory says it was called "Battle of Midway - The True Story" (or something close to that) that featured Dusty Kleiss prominently.

Edit to add:
Found it - available to stream from Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Midway-True-Story/dp/B08175Y46L


I have probably seen everyMidway film made plus documentaries and personal accounts…..and I watch most simply to be entertained. The latest one did not win me over as I too got a bit tired of the animation being a bit repetitive but the I suppose every attack on a Carrier was some what the same too.

I prefer reading over film when it comes to details and facts. Having some experience being the duck in a shooting gallery perhaps that allows me to visualize what it must have been like.

I am an old movie fan….and prefer black and white over color…..so I have to say the earlier versions are better.

As to imagination,…..imagine being in a torpedo bomber running in towards the Japanese fleet, having no Fighter cover, or dive bombers to divert enemy Fighters….seeing all of your Squadron shot down….along with yourself….hitting the water and then hiding under a seat cushion to avoid being killed or captured….then watching successful attacks and later being rescued as the sole survivor of your Squadron.

[NutLoose]

Dive bombing would be the worst, the Stuka was feared early on in the war until it was realised that if you held your nerve it wasn’t a moving target as such, you didn’t have to attempt to track it because it was coming straight at you, so wasn’t moving across the sky, just getting bigger in your sights. Therefore if you were pumping enough lead directly at it you had a fair chance of killing it.

if I was on a carrier then it would have been a British one with its armoured deck, the US and Japan with their wooden decks soon learnt that lesson sadly the hard way.

[SASless]

There were a lot of differences between the American Carrier Operations and the Japanese.

Here is an interesting article that discusses the topic in some detail.

https://www.quora.com/Why-in-the-Pacific-war-were-Japanese-aircraft-carriers-sunk-so-easily-compared-to-Americans?share=1

[tdracer]

if I was on a carrier then it would have been a British one with its armoured deck, the US and Japan with their wooden decks soon learnt that lesson sadly the hard way.

The lack of armor on the deck of the US carriers was a conscious design decision. Armoring the flight deck would have sharply reduced hanger deck space and hence the number of aircraft the carrier could carry. So the decision was made to armor the hanger deck instead. The result was the US Essex class carriers had a much bigger punch, but it left them with a bit of a glass jaw.
Given that no Essex class carriers were ever sunk by enemy action, it doesn't appear to have been a terrible tradeoff.

[TukwillaFlyboy]

The lack of armor on the deck of the US carriers was a conscious design decision. Armoring the flight deck would have sharply reduced hanger deck space and hence the number of aircraft the carrier could carry. So the decision was made to armor the hanger deck instead. The result was the US Essex class carriers had a much bigger punch, but it left them with a bit of a glass jaw.
Given that no Essex class carriers were ever sunk by enemy action, it doesn't appear to have been a terrible tradeoff.

My understanding is that the Royal Navy operating in the Mediterranean would have had much greater exposure to land-based aircraft. Hence the armoured flight deck. Fortuitously it also worked against Kamikaze in the Pacific as well.
Either way , Midway goes down in history as one of THE most decisive battles in history.
Along with Coral Sea and the Guadalcanal Campaign it stopped Japan dead in its tracks.
Lest we forget.

[stilton]

The 1976 film was very good, disappointing they chose to remake it, certain things should be left alone


Shame they couldn’t come up with a new idea

[Ddraig Goch]

You will find the best historical account by reading " Shattered Sword: the untold story of the Battle of Midway " by Jonathan Parshall.

[Chugalug2]

It was always a mystery to Danny42C, our greatly missed stalwart of the WWII RAF Pilots Brevet thread, as to why the success of USN Dive Bombers at Midway is not more celebrated. Admittedly that elephant in the room, luck, was ever present as it usually is in war. The planned co-ordinated attack of torpedo bombers and dive bombers came awry and the TBDs paid a dreadful price for that. The SBD dive bombers in contrast were spared in the main by the Japanese fighter screen being at low level, having despatched the TBDs. Thus they were able to carry out their surgical work largely unmolested save for AA fire, and despite not having a fighter escort. The result was arguably the greatest naval victory of WWII. Before it the IJN reigned supreme, after it the USN did. It was the beginning of the end indeed.

[SASless]

US Naval Intelligence Code Breakers deserve a lot of credit for the victory at Midway....in their gambit that identified "AF" as being Midway thus allowing Nimitz to position US Forces in the best location to counter the Japanese Attack.

Then there is the credit owed to the Shipyard Workers who worked miracle in doing repairs to the third of only three US Carriers.....done in 48 hours and while embarked enroute to the area of operations.

Also the gallantry of the Aircrews who flew on to attack the Japanese knowing they did not have the fuel to make it back to their Carrier....a great many of whom remain lost at sea following the battle.

"Luck" played a role....but it was built upon a lot of other factors including a lot of hard work, dedication, and just plain true grit.

Those Pilots had trained long and hard to be the best pilots In the Air and that must have had something to do with it as well.

From one account of the battle.....Aboard Yorktown, Lieutenant Dick Crowell voiced the message in even simpler terms when he bluntly told that carrier’s aviators, “The fate of the United States now rests in the hands of two hundred and forty pilots.”

Newspaper reporter Robert J. Casey, accompanying the American carriers to write an account for the people back home, asked one officer for his opinion of the aviators who piloted the old, slow-moving torpedo planes. “They don’t stand any watches,” he replied. “They don’t have to go out and do patrol jobs. They don’t have any dogfights to worry about. They may sit around playing poker for a month before they have to go out…. Then they go out and they don’t come back.”

These men, and others who braved enemy antiaircraft fire and fighters to swoop down on Nagumo’s carriers, altered the fortunes of war. Few returned, but the legacy they left behind remains to this day, for without their valor and sacrifice the Pacific War would have taken an ominous turn for the United States.

The Torpedo Squadrons suffered near total losses during the battle.

[tdracer]

Admittedly that elephant in the room, luck, was ever present as it usually is in war. The planned co-ordinated attack of torpedo bombers and dive bombers came awry and the TBDs paid a dreadful price for that.

What's worse was that the torpedoes that the TBDs were using were crap - routinely either detonating when they hit the water, or turning off course. So not only were the torpedo squadrons unlikely to return, they were unlikely to do any real damage. In a sense, being decoys to allow the dive bombers to attack relatively unmolested was the best they could have hoped for.
Truly courageous young men.

[brakedwell]

I almost went to Midway at the end of my Britannia course world trainer in 1966. We planned to fly nonstop from Guam to Honolulu with a refuelling stop at Midway if required. It was very close, but we just had enough fuel for the direct flight, which was a shame historically.

[MightyGem]

or you would end up with sh*te like Dunkirk…
Glad I'm not the only one who thought that. Over-hyped rubbish. Enjoyed the new Midway though.

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!]

War is bad enough on land, never mind at sea. I'm just glad that I never had to experience it. Respect to those that did.

I've seen films of the North Atlantic convoys and can say without a doubt that I just wouldn't want to be on a ship that keeps disappearing under mountains of water, so cold that it'd kill you within five minutes of you being in it - let alone having people try to sink you. I have no idea how people did that.

And not meant to be a flippant remark, but I wonder what it must be like if you have to fight but you're not feeling great that day, like if you worked in an office, you'd finally take a sick day - or if the weather was so bad that you didn't need a human enemy because you stood a chance of freezing to death on sentry duty. Like you say, it'd be bad enough on the best of days

[SASless]

While flying out of Broadford, Isle of Skye, on a MoD Contract providing support for the Test Range in Rassay Sound....we had an occasion to fly up and around to Loch Ewe....from where many Russian Convoys set forth from.

Having read quite a bit about the Russian Convoys it was a very interesting visit....done by helicopter.

It provided a real context to what those days must have been like for the Crews of the ships making their way to Russia under such perilous conditions.

Later on I made my way to Bataan, Corregidor, Wake Island, and many other WWII battlefields including one Christmas spent at Bastogne.

When you walk the ground and consider what took place there.....it is a very moving experience.

One Uncle was MIA for thirteen days during the Bulge, one had a 6x6 Truck bounced on top of him by an 88mm Artillery Round and had to dig himself out using his helmet, and the third island hopped in the Pacific with the Marines.

Those were some amazing people of that generation.

[PapaDolmio]

I almost went to Midway at the end of my Britannia course world trainer in 1966. We planned to fly nonstop from Guam to Honolulu with a refuelling stop at Midway if required. It was very close, but we just had enough fuel for the direct flight, which was a shame historically.

Round the world in a Brit! Which decade did you get back in? :)

[ORAC]

Round the world in a Brit! Which decade did you get back in? https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/smile.gif
I believe the Beverley with the tech spares is due back next week…

[brakedwell]

As early as that! The Britannia world trip, including the odd day off, took exactly two weeks.

[NutLoose]

Two weeks, not bad for the old Yacht, I bet the aircraft wouldn't do it that quickly. :rolleyes:

[Groundloop]

I cannot understand the hatred of CGI, without it you wouldn’t have a film

There is nothing wrong with CGI. What is wrong is how it is used to produce something totally unrealistic. As stated, the aircraft are FAR too close together. "Red Tails" was similar. I suppose they think it makes it far more exciting to those "not in the know" but for those who are it is simply laughable and spoils the whole film;.

[NutLoose]

I suppose the original Dambusters was ok then, except when they filmed the Lancs at 60ft it looked even higher so shot the aircraft scenes at 30ft.

[MG]

I got about 20 minutes into the new version and deleted it. There was one particularly annoying ‘maverick’ pilot who didn’t play by the rules. Seriously annoying.

[tdracer]

There is nothing wrong with CGI. What is wrong is how it is used to produce something totally unrealistic. As stated, the aircraft are FAR too close together. "Red Tails" was similar. I suppose they think it makes it far more exciting to those "not in the know" but for those who are it is simply laughable and spoils the whole film;.
Totally agree. Good special effects - regardless of how it's done - shouldn't attract attention to themselves as you are watching. It should seamlessly blend into the movie plot, then later on you reflect back on the movie and think 'how the hell did they film that scene?'. One of my all time favorites is the scene in "Terminator 2" - where the 'bad' terminator jumps the motorcycle out of the building and grabs onto the helicopter. Watching it, it just seems part of the movie - later on 'how did they do that', then watching it again you can dissect the different shots that were spliced together to make the scene.
In contrast, because of this thread I re-watched the 2019 Midway remake last night (I have it on Blu-Ray 4k - most of the time 4k is amazing, but for this movie it may actually be a determent by emphasizing the falseness of the CGI). The plot isn't bad (aside from some horribly unrealistic details), but so much of the CGI special effects had my mind screaming "THAT'S SO FAKE". Contrast that to say "Avatar" - where you can watch most of the movie without ever thinking about the fact that 10 ft. tall blue humanoids don't really exist...

[evansb]

Only three of the 200 nation states (countries) extant in 1942 had an effective aircraft carrier. What a coincidence that two of the three nations that had aircraft carriers would go to war with what was an extremely rare weapon and be involved in a pivotal battle. Just a coincidence I guess..
Conclusion: Technology precedes and foretells histrionics.

[BFSGrad]

What's worse was that the torpedoes that the TBDs were using were crap - routinely either detonating when they hit the water, or turning off course. So not only were the torpedo squadrons unlikely to return, they were unlikely to do any real damage. In a sense, being decoys to allow the dive bombers to attack relatively unmolested was the best they could have hoped for.
Truly courageous young men.
U.S. submariners in WWII found themselves in the identical situation as their torpedoes were ineffective in the early 1940s. The USN spectacularly dropped the ball on torpedo development entering WWII.
I also recommend the Kleiss and Parshall books.

[TukwillaFlyboy]

The failure of US torpedoes in the early part of WW2 was an epic fail of gigantic proportions.
It is a textbook example of bureaucratic incompetence.
”Run Silent Run Deep” is a good read.

[NutLoose]

My only failing on the CGI front was why everything appeared to burst into flames when hit and normally the port engine or wing.

[SASless]

Tuk,

Indeed the Mark XIV Torpedo had major problems....the background to why it had the problems it did....and the absolute refusal of those responsible for its pre-War design and testing to accept there were problems with the Torpedo and who blamed the problems on the Sub Crews...makes for interesting reading

You would think the UK Mod was running the show back then when you compare the attitudes and efforts to cover up systemic problems with aircraft in the way the US Navy safely sitting in Stateside Billets blamed operational crews.

Admiral Lockwood led the way in trying to fix the problems and deserves a lot of credit for his leadership of the Australian based Submarine operation.


https://www.historynet.com/us-torpedo-troubles-during-world-war-ii.htm

[Chugalug2]

OP, thanks for the heads up. Watched it on the Cinema app, and I'd echo those who said it was well made but perhaps for a less critical audience than found here. At least as a remake it wasn't a complete mess-up of the original as was that of The Italian Job. That was unforgiveable!

[SpamCanDriver]

I wouldn't class myself as a film snob & enjoy a mindless action film as much as the next guy.
But I found Midway completely unwatchable, it's almost as bad as pearl harbour.
Just my personal opinion of course

[NutLoose]

One thing you didn’t get was people smoking in Submarines underwater.

Greyhound is another good film